I finally got his new book and read through it. The best part of the book were the pictures. They were great! Especially since most of pictures have no relationship to ninjutsu and it's attempt to prove Togakure Ryu's authenticity was weak.

For someone with a PhD and great physical skill, his argument is illogical and at times contradicts itself. If he was writing fiction then it wouldn't matter. He is claiming this is an accurate and possibly the most thorough account of Ninjutsu. If it was thesis then it wouldn't stand up anywhere in Academia.

On top of that he has no sources or references to back up most his claims. He has made the same ole claims about Togakure Ryu without any proof. A PhD knows that is No-No. The sources he did use were almost all written by Takamatsu which still have not been verified by him or anyone else.

He fills the book with a lot of fluff about other schools and the information was also inaccurate. This has been confirmed by both high ranking Bujinkan, X-kan members and others. He also showed no proof that these claims were true. (MAP)

Others who have discussed the book like SkuggVarg on MAP have claimed fault of the publishing company. Really? Didn't you say the same thing about the interview he did with Kwoon too? Is French really that difficult to translate? Has it become so obscure that only small group are able to translate French to English? The two languages share a common base!

Reasons it is not good:

1. He has shown no proof that Togakure Ryu is real.2. He has a lot of inaccuracies about different Japanese Budo. (verified by others) Which makes you wonder about his claims for ninjutsu.3. He makes claims of 'truth' without using the same rules of logical argument that any PhD candidate would know to write their thesis. I have read better laid out arguments by Zenigata, RJHillIII and DonRoley despite disagreeing with them.

I would love for Mr. Roley to defend the legitimacy of this book.

SideNote: I have seen a guy on Youtube explaining some of these things alot better than me. I know one reason for his discussion about Kacem's book is to drum up support/interest for his own upcoming book on Ninjutsu. It will be published by the same company as Kacem's book. Despite his motivation he does have some valid points.

Interestingly enough, there's a review of Cummins' book by scottbaioisdead ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR9jyAxn044 ) that gives the impression that his information comes from going through various Bujinkan and Genbukan sites and copying information and photos.

Didn't you say the same thing about the interview he did with Kwoon too?

Not that I can remember. Care to enlighten me where I say it? Are you refering to the discussion over on E-budo perhaps? I read it but did not participate in it.

Quote:

Others who have discussed the book like SkuggVarg on MAP have claimed fault of the publishing company. Really?

Yes, I cant tell if this is true or not but this is what I heard personally from the author of the book. This would be more about the translation of some names, wrong footnotes and pictures in the wrong place.

I think it is also worth mentioning that the book should have been published a long time ago and for some obscure reason (which the author seems to have nothing to do with) it has been postponed several times. If I remember correctly, the material for the book is many years old by now. Also, if someone missed it, it is not Mr Zougharis thesis, nor was he a Ph.d when he wrote it. It is not an academic work but rather aimed at the general martial arts population I think. Apart from that I think the book is great and Ive never before read such interesting footnotes in any book (certainly not one about ninjutsu).

Skuggvarg wrote: Yes, I cant tell if this is true or not but this is what I heard personally from the author of the book. This would be more about the translation of some names, wrong footnotes and pictures in the wrong place. I think it is also worth mentioning that the book should have been published a long time ago and for some obscure reason (which the author seems to have nothing to do with) it has been postponed several times. If I remember correctly, the material for the book is many years old by now. Also, if someone missed it, it is not Mr Zougharis thesis, nor was he a Ph.d when he wrote it. It is not an academic work but rather aimed at the general martial arts population I think. Apart from that I think the book is great and Ive never before read such interesting footnotes in any book (certainly not one about ninjutsu). Regards / Skuggvarg

Skuggvarg,

We discussed that interview here, not on E-budo, remember? It shouldn't be that hard because it wasn't that long ago. Never said it was his thesis. As a PhD, he knows that anything claimed as true must be backed up with evidence.

If you are using your PhD in a specific area as credibility about the material and claim said statements are true then proof should be provided of said truth. Correct? Especially things that still have not been proven true to this day. I as well as others were held up to the same standards in numerous discussions here and on other forums. You have been one of those individuals in the past who has made such comments. Why should he be any different? Idolizing?

Whether he was a PhD at the time or not is irrelevant. His audience is also irrelevant. He has been working on his PhD or in the world of Academia for most of his career and he knows the score. It is either fact, fiction or both which means fiction. He is selling a history book. If it isn't true then it should be sold under the same section as 'Dan Brown books'.

He is claiming that something is true History yet shows no proof that it true. Then he writes in the book prologue that he doesn't care what others think about the material but believes it is true based on his research. He only uses evidence that is material written by Takamatsu in modern times. Which are the same things he said in that interview.

He refused to use outside sources to support his claims. The reason being none of the outside sources supports his claims about Togakure Ryu. Even that same material that Don Roley was saying was the evidence that proved Takamatsu was telling the truth about everything. It wasn't there. So what does it say about Don Roley's proof? Sounds like there are some big holes in Kacem's research and he knows it.

It seems as more and more info about ninjutsu gets out there are larger and larger holes in Takamatsu's story.

Your excuses for Kacem and the book don't hold up.

Thanks for the reply.

Posted on: 2010/6/14 20:51

_________________
You can't block my ip address forever. You can also try to mess with my account because you don't like what I say. I'm not going anywhere. You know who you are! HA!

Stormy wrote: Oh come on, you can't believe the rantings of an idiot like Cummings man, do a search on MAP and read his history.

Stormy you can also go on MAP and read about Kacem's book.

Quote:

Jibran wrote: Interestingly enough, there's a review of Cummins' book by scottbaioisdead ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR9jyAxn044 ) that gives the impression that his information comes from going through various Bujinkan and Genbukan sites and copying information and photos.

That is a review of a previous book. Not the other book coming out. His books are not related to the conversation. The conversation was about inaccurracies in Kacem's book which Mr. Cummins pointed out. The points he made are valid. Others have also made similar observations.

If you go on other sites like MAP with Stormy then you can see similar comments by more credible individuals in the Bujinkan and other X-kans.

Posted on: 2010/6/14 20:59

_________________
You can't block my ip address forever. You can also try to mess with my account because you don't like what I say. I'm not going anywhere. You know who you are! HA!

We discussed that interview here, not on E-budo, remember? It shouldn't be that hard because it wasn't that long ago. Never said it was his thesis. As a PhD, he knows that anything claimed as true must be backed up with evidence.

Dear JWillz,

Sorry I cant remember. Couldnt find it when I did a search either. Can you point me to what I wrote? All I remember about the Kwoon interview was a silly discussion around a word that sounded like "kaiden" but which had different meaning. It was a lame attack on Mr Zoughari since even a japanese noob kan see the difference and Mr Zoughari is far more skilled in the language, not to mention kanji.

Quote:

He is claiming that something is true History yet shows no proof that it true. Then he writes in the book prologue that he doesn't care what others think about the material but believes it is true based on his research. He only uses evidence that is material written by Takamatsu in modern times. Which are the same things he said in that interview.

Maybe you had too high expectations on the book (some others may have had it too)? For the record, Mr Zoughari has, to my knowledge, never claimed he would put any "real" proof in the book. He did mention however, that no work had been done with so many references to historical records.

I used to tutor French and I would be willing to write Dr Zoughari an email in the language outlining some of the questions people have (provided they're given in a coherent manner and not part of a wall of text) as I've got a few questions as well.

I don't have his email though, so someone (Skuggvarg?) will have to pass it on to me.

So far, I've heard things raised about:

Gyokko ryu tojutsuTakamatsu sensei/Toda schools' veracity (this bit can be counted as a sort of 'taking up the offer' on Dr Zoughari's point that he will prove his research if asked)Hyoho Niten Ichi ryu kenjutsu